Key Interventions of Palliative Cancer Care (Ki-Pcc) - Patient Perceived Need and Remembered Delivery By Health-Care Professionals (Hcp): a Prospective, Longitudinal, Multicenter Study

  • Magaya-Kalbermatten N
  • Achimas-Cadariu P
  • Curca R
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aim: The integration of PC in oncology is challenging, particularly in resource-restricted and regulatory disperse settings with variable training of HCPs. To identify gaps and in a second step to improve care of advanced, incurable cancer patients ( pts), we collect a “reality map” of KI-PCCs and quality indicators (QI). Methods: Randomly selected pts (ECOG PS 1-3, PC needs [≥3 IPOS items ≥2]) from predefined populations (5 Romanian, 1 Swiss institution) are followed for 6 months or until death. Demographics (modified EAPC basic dataset), PC needs (symptoms [IPOS], quality of life [EQ5D], perceived need for KI-PCC), remembered delivery of KI-PCCs by HCPs, and QI are assessed monthly. KI-PCC encompass 1. illness/ prognosis understanding 2. symptom management, 3. decision making, 4. spirituality, 5. End-of-Life preparation, and 6. support network ( pts, families). QI include inappropriate anticancer care, symptom burden, repeated ER admissions, aggressive EOL-care, and quality of death and dying (country-adapted QODD). This analysis at first follow-up (FU) explores the difference of KI-PCC need and delivery, the final analysis will test if KI-PCCs correlate with QIs. Results: 291 pts were included (61.5 y, 52% female, mean ECOG 2 [28% 3], common cancer types [lung, GI, GU], 78% chemotherapy, 66% urban, 47% college educ., 75% married, 15% living alone), 197 completed ≥1 FU so far. At baseline and FU, respectively, 211/147 pts (73/75%) felt to have all information, nurses judged 81/69 (28/35%) had; 67/34 poorly informed pts (23/17%) got no intervention (KI-PCC #1). 274/164 pts had ≥1 symptom, 109/- (40/-%) got all, 42/42 (15/26%) no symptom addressed (#2). 127/53 pts had toxicities requiring new decisions (44/27%), 81/38 (28/ 19%) got involved (#3). 223/120 pts (77/61%) had spiritual needs, 96/- (33/-%) had HCPs addressing them (#4). 64/39 pts (22/20%) wanted to discuss ≥1 EOL-issue (progression, terminal suffering, time left, family prepared, place of death, finish business) with HCP, in 43/30 (15/15%) it happened (#5). 56/30 pts (19/15%) needed help at home, 77/11 (26/6%) needed ER, in 40/19 (14/10%) a care plan was made (#6). Conclusions: Our data suggest a substantial gap between perceived need for and delivered KI-PCCs, without rapid change after 1 month. Swiss-Romanian Partnership (SNF-IZERZO_142226/1). Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Magaya-Kalbermatten, N., Achimas-Cadariu, P., Curca, R., Grigorescu, A., Mosiou, D., Poroch, V., & Strasser, F. (2014). Key Interventions of Palliative Cancer Care (Ki-Pcc) - Patient Perceived Need and Remembered Delivery By Health-Care Professionals (Hcp): a Prospective, Longitudinal, Multicenter Study. Annals of Oncology, 25, iv474. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu350.11

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free